1. Give voters the option of rating debates. This rating, in addition to a debate's "likes" and views, would be used to calculate a debate's "popularity index" for the following:

2. Forum sections would advertise three of the hottest debates relevant to the section at the top of the page. Users could turn this off if they wanted to.

3. Users could follow others' debate activity, and be notified when one of their debates went into the voting period.

4. Users could subscribe to an automated service that would send them a message listing that month's most popular/highly rated debates.

5. Voting would award points that could be used to advertise debates. In addition, the number of votes a user casts within the preceding month would be used to calculate how likely it is that one of their debates (nominated by them) would be featured on the front page for a given site visit (it would change each time).

Vote Quality

1. Implement an option that would require voters to spend a certain amount of time on a debate before voting. If possible, the time would pause when it's detected the user isn't actively viewing the page.

2. Replace (or add to) the "Made more convincing arguments" criterion with "Argued their position more effectively". As it is now, someone can just outline the typical arguments in favor of their resolution and win the votes of everyone already in agreement, as those arguments, in a sense, "already convinced them". This places too much emphasis on the resolution itself.

3. Source, conduct and spelling/grammar points in favor of one side would count only if at least 50 percent of voters also granted them. These criteria would initially be unchecked i.e., not marked tied by de facto. Since they are abused so frequently, I'd also be inclined to just remove them all together.

Miscellaneous:

1. Update the search function to have it look for entire phrases rather than individual words.

2. The ability for members to comment on debates with annotations. Next to a debate would be a list of members who had made comments. Checking the box next to a name would show all of that user's highlights, and cursoring over a highlight would reveal their comment.

3. This is probably a horrible idea, but - allow opinion/polls to be integrated into the OP of a thread.

4. Have DDO tabs show notifications. For instance, if someone got a notification, a (1) would appear next to the DDO logo.

"1. Implement an option that would require voters to spend a certain amount of time on a debate before voting. If possible, the time would pause when it's detected the user isn't actively viewing the page."

No, this is an awful idea. It could be easily bypassed and would just be a burden to otherwise honest voters. Also, if it glitches, voters may not be able to vote at all.

"1. Implement an option that would require voters to spend a certain amount of time on a debate before voting. If possible, the time would pause when it's detected the user isn't actively viewing the page."

No, this is an awful idea. It could be easily bypassed and would just be a burden to otherwise honest voters. Also, if it glitches, voters may not be able to vote at all.

What about this: when someone views a debate, their account is permitted to vote on it after X amount of time (regardless of whether they are on the page). If implemented properly, I don't see how this would become a burden for honest voters. Also, this idea isn't intended to prevent purposeful circumvention of its measures, but rather meant to cut down on casual votebombs. It would be an option anyway, so debaters could choose whether to have it.

1. Give voters the option of rating debates. This rating, in addition to a debate's "likes" and views, would be used to calculate a debate's "popularity index" for the following:

2. Forum sections would advertise three of the hottest debates relevant to the section at the top of the page. Users could turn this off if they wanted to.

3. Users could follow others' debate activity, and be notified when one of their debates went into the voting period.

4. Users could subscribe to an automated service that would send them a message listing that month's most popular/highly rated debates.

5. Voting would award points that could be used to advertise debates. In addition, the number of votes a user casts within the preceding month would be used to calculate how likely it is that one of their debates (nominated by them) would be featured on the front page for a given site visit (it would change each time).

Vote Quality

1. Implement an option that would require voters to spend a certain amount of time on a debate before voting. If possible, the time would pause when it's detected the user isn't actively viewing the page.

2. Replace (or add to) the "Made more convincing arguments" criterion with "Argued their position more effectively". As it is now, someone can just outline the typical arguments in favor of their resolution and win the votes of everyone already in agreement, as those arguments, in a sense, "already convinced them". This places too much emphasis on the resolution itself.

3. Source, conduct and spelling/grammar points in favor of one side would count only if at least 50 percent of voters also granted them. These criteria would initially be unchecked i.e., not marked tied by de facto. Since they are abused so frequently, I'd also be inclined to just remove them all together.

Miscellaneous:

1. Update the search function to have it look for entire phrases rather than individual words.

2. The ability for members to comment on debates with annotations. Next to a debate would be a list of members who had made comments. Checking the box next to a name would show all of that user's highlights, and cursoring over a highlight would reveal their comment.

3. This is probably a horrible idea, but - allow opinion/polls to be integrated into the OP of a thread.

4. Have DDO tabs show notifications. For instance, if someone got a notification, a (1) would appear next to the DDO logo.

Many of these ideas would be difficult to implement. Also, keep in mind that tons of features is not always a good thing. Websites can get too cluttered with features.

Voter participation ideas

A popularity index would be a pretty useless feature in my opinion. I also don't like the idea of users being able to advertise their debates. I do like the idea of an email about the most popular debate of the month, but it's not high on my list of changes I'd like to see on DDO. At all. Also, why not just utilize the already existing +1 and -1 buttons to choose which debate was the most popular rather than setting up a new "popularity points" system.

By the way, users can already opt to get notifications via email about their favorite debates.

Vote quality ideas

Number one is an awful idea. I read at an extremely fast rate and would find it annoying having to wait until I get to vote.

Your second suggestion under this heading is a good one.

Miscellaneous ideas

I am in favor of suggestions 1 and 4. Suggestion 2 sounds interesting and useful but it would be extremely difficult to implement and could result in the page looking extremely cluttered.

As for the polls and opinions, I think we should get rid of them entirely.

"1. Implement an option that would require voters to spend a certain amount of time on a debate before voting. If possible, the time would pause when it's detected the user isn't actively viewing the page."

No, this is an awful idea. It could be easily bypassed and would just be a burden to otherwise honest voters. Also, if it glitches, voters may not be able to vote at all.

What about this: when someone views a debate, their account is permitted to vote on it after X amount of time (regardless of whether they are on the page). If implemented properly, I don't see how this would become a burden for honest voters. Also, this idea isn't intended to prevent purposeful circumvention of its measures, but rather meant to cut down on casual votebombs. It would be an option anyway, so debaters could choose whether to have it.

If users can not be on the page and still have the timer on when they can vote count down what is the point in the first place? It's not going to force them to spend more time reading the debate.

And why would anyone turn on an optional feature that will force them to wait to vote?

"Most of the coldness in the world is actually just people teaching lessons about the coldness in the world. And it does not remove blame from the people cranking the AC." -Ore_Ele

"You see, Adam never spoke about theology. He just had sex with Eve and died." -1970vu

I think it would be cool if the voting period debates were shown directly in the middle of the front page. It would also be nice if we did a couple little things, like make the messages, argument alerts, and notifications separate, have a homepage section for new and popular members, and maybe make the site a more appealing color.

At 1/6/2014 8:58:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:Ill list some ideas when I get home and am not on the iPhone.

Of course, I'm still pimping the thumbs up for RFDs (single thumbs up per debate, no thumbs down) as a way to promote and reward quality votes without discouraging vote quantity.

Also, making a second group of stats that are the recent stats, which show your posts this season, your debates this season, even your ELO for just this season, and having us offer some kind of awards for seasonal winners.

Let's see, giving more options to control who can accept your debate. Change the ELO and completed debates from drop down menus to fill in the blanks.

Another one I would like would be for any debate that has 2 forfeits (I'm toying between if they should have to be 2 in a row, or just 2) by a single person is an auto win for the person that did not forfeit. It does not go to the voting period, it does not appear in the recently ended debates, but it is still listed as a win and loss for the respected parties.

At 1/6/2014 8:58:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:Ill list some ideas when I get home and am not on the iPhone.

Of course, I'm still pimping the thumbs up for RFDs (single thumbs up per debate, no thumbs down) as a way to promote and reward quality votes without discouraging vote quantity.

Also, making a second group of stats that are the recent stats, which show your posts this season, your debates this season, even your ELO for just this season, and having us offer some kind of awards for seasonal winners.

Let's see, giving more options to control who can accept your debate. Change the ELO and completed debates from drop down menus to fill in the blanks.

Another one I would like would be for any debate that has 2 forfeits (I'm toying between if they should have to be 2 in a row, or just 2) by a single person is an auto win for the person that did not forfeit. It does not go to the voting period, it does not appear in the recently ended debates, but it is still listed as a win and loss for the respected parties.

I'd agree with 3-4. I would say it should depend in the amount of round though. We could also maybe have a debate where you allow not just one person, but maybe a couple people, or a group. For example, you would make it so that Ore-Ele, DudeStop, and ______ can only except this debate. That would eliminate debates with trollers.

At 1/6/2014 8:58:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:Ill list some ideas when I get home and am not on the iPhone.

Of course, I'm still pimping the thumbs up for RFDs (single thumbs up per debate, no thumbs down) as a way to promote and reward quality votes without discouraging vote quantity.

Also, making a second group of stats that are the recent stats, which show your posts this season, your debates this season, even your ELO for just this season, and having us offer some kind of awards for seasonal winners.

Let's see, giving more options to control who can accept your debate. Change the ELO and completed debates from drop down menus to fill in the blanks.

Another one I would like would be for any debate that has 2 forfeits (I'm toying between if they should have to be 2 in a row, or just 2) by a single person is an auto win for the person that did not forfeit. It does not go to the voting period, it does not appear in the recently ended debates, but it is still listed as a win and loss for the respected parties.

I'd agree with 3-4. I would say it should depend in the amount of round though. We could also maybe have a debate where you allow not just one person, but maybe a couple people, or a group. For example, you would make it so that Ore-Ele, DudeStop, and ______ can only except this debate. That would eliminate debates with trollers.

And in saying this it's not a group debate idea, but merely saying only that certain people can except.

At 1/7/2014 3:39:52 PM, dylancatlow wrote:Another idea: combine the opinion and poll sections by removing the poll section and not requiring explanations for the opinion section.

There are useful options on it... I hate the "yes for this, no for that" opinion section polling. However combining the two makes a lot of sense; likely with an option when one is made if comments should be required (and what length).

Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

I really want to get notifications when someone comments on a debate I have commented on. Oftentimes, I comment something and someone addresses a reply to me, but I don't check the debate again until 3 weeks into the post-voting period....

How about the DDO Hunger Games? I've already posted this in the "Games" section, but it's more serious and would actually be a sight feature, so I'll post it here. I am not being sarcastic, and actually think this should be added to the website.

On a random day each in January, April, July, and October, 24 members are randomly selected, regardless of number of posts, activity, and debates. They just need an active account. Then, a bracket is made, such as the one below:

Each round, a member must debate why they deserve an account more than their opponent. Winners move on to the next round, losers have their accounts deleted. This continues until only one account remains. Winners get into the HoF and never have to return to the DDO Hunger Games.

How does this help DDO?

Odds are, as only twenty four accounts will be picked, an extremely large majority of them won't have been touched in years. At best, and most likely, twenty-four useless accounts will be closed every three months. At worst, two or three prominent DDO members will have their accounts deleted. This idea, which would be implemented by TUF and airmax, would do far more good than harm.

Stooge the Worst

#StandWithBossy

#UnbanTheCuntMan

"bossy r u like 85 years old and have lost ur mind"
~mysteriouscrystals

"I've honestly never seen seventh post anything that wasn't completely idiotic in a trying-to-be-funny way."
~F-16